The Middle East has suffered, and
continues to suffer, from ongoing tensions between the US and Iran. As it is
the strategic region for global powers, US-Iran tensions affected oil routes,
regional alliances and global security balances. In a recent official statement
U.S. officials have warned that the ceasefire is fragile and that any violation
could restart escalation, maintaining a strict but cautious diplomatic stance
toward Iran. Pakistan is a country that both sides trust; that is why both
agreed to hold peace talks in the capital of Pakistan on Saturday, April 11,
2026, local time in Islamabad. Many mediators only provide platform diplomacy,
but actual success depends on follow up diplomacy not just hosting talks. This
is a diplomatic opportunity for Pakistan, and its role is very crucial as it
requires strong legal and political commitment along with neutrality. Just as
the United Nations promotes peace between nations, Pakistan is trying to do the
same to maintain long-term stability. Here, a question arises: Pakistan’s
mediation efforts converted the war between the US and Iran into a two-week
fragile peace, but will this temporary ceasefire turn into permanent peace?
Pakistan, acting as a facilitator,
is providing legal grounds for sustainable peace between states. However, peace
cannot be enforced upon other nations. In its public messaging, Pakistan has
publicly positioned itself as a neutral diplomatic platform aimed at
facilitating dialogue rather than imposing outcomes, reinforcing its role as a
bridge between competing geopolitical interests. According to Article 33 of the
UN Charter, part of Chapter VI, parties to any serious dispute must first seek
peaceful solutions through negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or judicial
settlement. Pakistan is trying its best to follow the United Nations approach
in this sensitive situation. The country is taking advantage of its relations
with different blocs, i.e., Middle Eastern countries and Western powers by
acting as a bridge between conflicting sides to achieve durable peace.
A ceasefire is the first legal step
towards peace and a temporary halt in fighting, which was facilitated by
Pakistan. It is often fragile; however, if proper facilitation is provided,
this temporary calm can turn into long-term harmony as it guides and encourages
reasonable and voluntary solutions. Durable peace requires formal agreements
under international law, and it becomes easier if the efforts of a third party
are carried out correctly. As we have seen in many examples, ceasefires have
broken down because assistance was not handled properly. For instance, in the
Sri Lankan civil war, the ceasefire mediated by Norway between the LTTE
(Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) and the Government of Sri Lanka collapsed
because the mediator did not complete its role effectively, and the root causes
remained unresolved. To ensure peace, it is the facilitator’s job to address
the root causes that escalate conflict and resolve them by bringing both
parties into an agreement that is acceptable to both sides.
We should also keep in mind that
success depends entirely on the consent of the conflicting parties, as
international law is consent-based, not coercive. Mediation can create dialogue
but cannot guarantee peace outcomes. Iran and the United States are sovereign
states, and according to the principle of non-intervention, Pakistan can
mediate but cannot impose agreements or pressure parties into legal
obligations. Iranian officials have emphasized that any agreement must fully
respect national sovereignty and long-term security interests, indicating that
while dialogue is possible, imposed conditions will not be accepted.
Pakistan can promote dialogue,
trust-building, and continuous diplomacy, but it cannot guarantee peace. True
peace depends on the political will of states, not just mediation efforts. We
must accept that this temporary ceasefire facilitated by Pakistan is also of
great importance in reducing tensions in the Middle East, as short pauses reduce
human suffering, military escalation, and regional instability. The success of
any mediation effort is not determined in Islamabad alone; it depends on
whether the conflicting parties accept mutual constraints and commit to binding
agreements. In this scenario, the significance of Pakistan’s role continues to
lie in its ability to facilitate dialogue between two deeply hostile rival
parties. However, the relationship between the United States and Iran has long
been marked by mistrust, security concerns, and regional power politics;
therefore, it is not possible to achieve a lasting solution through a single
round of talks but such engagements can pave the way for a durable settlement.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of ICEP.
_6784.jpg)
